Marlow, E C; Chmutina, K and Dainty, A (2023) Interpreting sustainability and resilience in the built environment. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 14(3), pp. 332-348. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: Conceptual interpretations of sustainability and resilience are widening with discursive use and altering the relationship and understanding of both concepts. By using three city case studies in the USA, this paper aims to consider which conceptual interpretations are operational and what is being measured in the context of city policy, municipal planning and built environment practice. With increasing pressures of urbanisation, it is imperative to consider which conceptual interpretations of resilience and sustainability are being measured in frameworks for the built environment if Risk-Informed Sustainable Development across multiple sectors is to be delivered. Design/methodology/approach: Three case studies with semi-structured interviews have been thematically analysed to explore how sustainability and resilience have been operationalised at policy, planning and practice levels. Findings: City policies, municipal planning and practitioners are working with different interpretations. Collectively Risk Informed Sustainable Development is not formally recognised. Policies recognise GHG reductions and natural hazard events; planning guidance stipulates Environmental Impact Assessments based on legal requirements; and practitioners consider passive-survivability and systematic thinking. Across the sectors, the Leadership in Environmental and Energy Assessment Method provides a common foundation but is used with varying requirements. Practical implications: Decision-makers should incorporate risk-informed sustainable development, update codes of practice and legal requirements leading to exemplary practice becoming normalised. Social implications: Passive-survivability should be affordable and adopt risk-informed sustainable development principles. Originality/value: Three US city case studies with data collected from interviews have been analysed simultaneously at policy, planning and practice levels. Interrelated implications have been outlined on how to improve decision-making of sustainability and resilience across sectors.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case study; city; interpretations; measurement; resilience; sustainability |
| Index terms: | natural hazard, municipal planning, sustainable development, interview, practitioner, methodology, decision-making, environmental impact assessment, risk-informed, becoming, case study, urbanization, built environment, codes of practice |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, regulatory law, infrastructure and transport systems, philosophical process, environmental hazards, research methods, health safety and environment, financial risk, urban planning, data collection methods, environmental impact, practitioner |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Governance, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Risk Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Cost Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here